User talk:Muboshgu/Archive 33
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Muboshgu. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | → | Archive 40 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
4th GA Cup - Round 2
 Greetings, GA Cup competitors! December 29th marked the end of the first round, after it was extended from its previously scheduled conclusion at the end of November. Because of the smaller pool of contestants this year, it was decided to keep sign-ups open throughout the month of December. This extension proved to be very helpful as we saw that more users signed up and completed many reviews. Krishna Chaitanya Velaga earned an impressive 402 points, followed by Cartoon network freak with a close 338 points. Shearonink who signed up after our extension was in third with 170 points. We had a rule clarification in Round 1 which was that many articles were being passed with blatant copyright violations and plagarism occurring in the articles. Thus, the judges have concluded that if an article is passed even if it has a copyright violation/plagarism, we will not provide points for that article as it wouldn't be considered a "complete review" under the scoring rules. In the end, 94 articles were reviewed by 14 users who will all advance to Round 2. The judges had planned on having 16 contestants advance but since only 14 did, we are changing the pools in this round. We will be having 2 pools of 3 and 2 pools of 4 in Round 2, with the top 2 in each pool advancing to Round 3 as well as the top participant ("9th place") of all remaining competitors. Round 2 will begin on January 1 at 00:00:00 UTC and will end on January 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase! To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:22, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Brandon Wilds
You removed my source before I finished. Toeknee44 (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Toeknee44: I didn't remove a source, you didn't add one. All edits should be made with a source. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:52, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Deleted Edits
Hi. I made changes to a wikipedia article today and all of my work has been deleted. I restored it and just got an email again that it's all been deleted. I would like to get it restored. I am working in conjunction with Ron Slotin, who the page is about, and am distressed that everything has been deleted. I did make some meaningless changes which led to this but will not do that again. The entire article however was accurate. Please let me know how I can restore it.
Thank you,
Lauren Laurenmen (talk) 02:32, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Laurenmen: As I mentioned in the edit summary when I undid your edit, there were problems with your contribution. First, much of the language did not conform to a neutral point of view, such as "Slotin has extensive business experience" and "Slotin led the fight". Also, much of your edits was sourced to Slotin's campaign site, which is not acceptable for point of view concerns. Reliable sources should be independent of the subject. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Unsuccessful nominations to the Cabinet of the United States
On 4 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Unsuccessful nominations to the Cabinet of the United States, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the United States Senate rejected Caleb Cushing's nomination to be Secretary of the Treasury three times in one day? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Unsuccessful nominations to the Cabinet of the United States. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Unsuccessful nominations to the Cabinet of the United States), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:01, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Clay Higgins
Hello! Your submission of Clay Higgins at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! EdChem (talk) 07:51, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Paul Penzone for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Penzone is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Penzone until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Yorman Landa page
Sorry. I did not know that the article had already been created and deleted. Apologies,
Dylan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cricketer993 (talk • contribs) 02:45, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Cricketer993: It's okay. It was an honest mistake. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:56, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Bias
Interesting discussion yesterday, the right result of course. In the meantime, just today, a car bomb killed 43 in Syria so I was hoping you'd be making good with your suggestion that more of these kinds of regular bombing articles from Syria is nominated at ITNC. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: The wrong decision was reached. The shooter was a mentally ill veteran of the Iraq War, that should've been plenty. Maybe I'll propose that ITN rename itself "ITN except for American mass shootings" so we can at least be honest about it. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:19, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well, just because the shooter was mentally ill, I would go so far as to suggest that most of the shooters in the US (and around the world) are mentally ill, apart from those deliberately engaged in terrorism which they seem to think gives them a free pass to Nirvana. In any case, please make good with your suggestion, and I look forward to seeing the Syria car-bombing at ITNC, after all, such a gratuitous and bloody event, with ten times the death count should be considered, right? Or is it just because they're Syrians? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: I said I'd support those nominations, I didn't say I'd nominate them myself. I see there's no article for it. That is systemic bias. You're so concerned with the systemic bias of not enough Middle East violence noms, go for it. I'm concerned about the systemic bias totally disqualifying an entire subject of stories as routine, even when their news coverage proves it's not routine. Plus there's the whole difference of Syria being a war zone and Fort Lauderdale not being in one. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well, just take issue with your last point, the US is a warzone, with hundreds of mass shootings a year, tens of thousands of people killed by firearms. Simple. A warzone. Compare it the UK or Australia or New Zealand or Canada or Japan or some other first world country if you dare. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- War zones are where there is war. Mass shootings in the United States are being disregarded as a whole, unless it's an Islamic shooter. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- False claim, as already demonstrated. 2012 Aurora shooting, 2009 Fort Hood shooting, 2011 Tucson shooting were posted as notable etc etc. While we then have 2012 Seattle cafe shooting spree and 2012 Minneapolis workplace shooting and 2012 Azana Spa shootings and Oikos University shooting etc etc etc which weren't. Many of the latter were more significant than this one. America is at war, with itself. There are very few first world countries which have so many firearm-related deaths and multiple shootings and lone wolf incidents. Can you name another? English-language Wikipedia editors are now more-than tired of hearing about these repeated internal problems of the US, as described by others (and backed up by our own article on Mass shooting) 374 incidents last year, so one per day is legitimate. Just some of them take place on Junk Street, Junk County, Junkville. They're all the same though, unless something seriously differentiates them, and in this case, an army vet going postal, doesn't. At an airport? Well that would have been interesting if it wasn't for the absurdity that you can check guns into baggage. It's about time the US looked strongly at themselves in this regard and stop the NRA and Trump, but it's not going to happen. I sympathise, you live in an incredibly violent country and I wouldn't wish that on anyone. In the UK we've had three "mass shootings" in about 30 years. You've had three mass shootings in the last three days. Something's different, something's not right. Your claim that we'd disregard it as a whole is spot on, it's business as usual. If it's terrorism, then it's a different matter, a vet being indoctrinated into Daesh etc, like Homeland. That would be a story worth posting. And if it transpires that's the case, I'm fully in support. In the meantime, "American with legally obtained guns shoots other Americans who might have legally obtained guns" is of no interest to anyone outside the microcosm of the US I'm afraid. P.S. You need to disambiguate Dan Jennings on your user page. You're welcome! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- War zones are where there is war. Mass shootings in the United States are being disregarded as a whole, unless it's an Islamic shooter. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well, just take issue with your last point, the US is a warzone, with hundreds of mass shootings a year, tens of thousands of people killed by firearms. Simple. A warzone. Compare it the UK or Australia or New Zealand or Canada or Japan or some other first world country if you dare. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: I said I'd support those nominations, I didn't say I'd nominate them myself. I see there's no article for it. That is systemic bias. You're so concerned with the systemic bias of not enough Middle East violence noms, go for it. I'm concerned about the systemic bias totally disqualifying an entire subject of stories as routine, even when their news coverage proves it's not routine. Plus there's the whole difference of Syria being a war zone and Fort Lauderdale not being in one. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
- Well, just because the shooter was mentally ill, I would go so far as to suggest that most of the shooters in the US (and around the world) are mentally ill, apart from those deliberately engaged in terrorism which they seem to think gives them a free pass to Nirvana. In any case, please make good with your suggestion, and I look forward to seeing the Syria car-bombing at ITNC, after all, such a gratuitous and bloody event, with ten times the death count should be considered, right? Or is it just because they're Syrians? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
"420" collaboration
As a member of WikiProject Cannabis, you are invited to help organize the project's upcoming "420" collaboration, which is scheduled for April 2017. Yes, we're a few months away, but we're hoping to get the ball rolling by getting buy-in from experienced Wikipedia editors and seek help fleshing out some goals and ideas for a successful campaign. We also plan to conduct both on-wiki and offlline outreach so non-Wikipedias can also contribute. If you are interested in participating, please sign up and contribute to the ongoing discussions. All editors are welcome! ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Clay Higgins
On 11 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clay Higgins, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that U.S. Representative Clay Higgins has been dubbed the "Cajun John Wayne"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clay Higgins. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Clay Higgins), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Schwede66 00:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 01:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
--Cameron11598 (Talk) 01:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 January 2017
- From the editor: Next steps for the Signpost
- News and notes: Surge in RFA promotions—a sign of lasting change?
- In the media: Year-end roundups, Wikipedia's 16th birthday, and more
- Featured content: One year ends, and another begins
- Arbitration report: Concluding 2016 and covering 2017's first two cases
- Traffic report: Out with the old, in with the new
- Technology report: Tech present, past, and future
Reference errors on 17 January
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Richard Bleier page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:25, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
RfC Notice
There is a Request for Comment posted at Talk:New York Daily News#Request for Comment. You are being notified as a registered editor who has commented on that article's talk page or in a related move review. --Tenebrae (talk) 22:50, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 01:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Ed Erhart (WMF) (talk) 01:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Yordano Ventura
On 23 January 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Yordano Ventura, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 02:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Andy Marte
On 23 January 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Andy Marte, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 08:37, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Left images
You wrote: "...left flush images cannot lead a section per WP:MOS..." I did not know that and thought otherwise. I'm looking at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images and cannot find where it says that. Could you please help? Many thanks. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:08, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Anna Frodesiak: Thanks for asking, because now that you mention it I don't see it either. It was there, but has been removed? I recall it being an issue of accessibility, but it's not listed at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Accessibility#Images. I need to look into this, maybe I'm remembering a rule that is moot. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:14, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hello, my friend. Please let me know if you have new info on this. I've been making articles for years with section-top-left images. :) Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- It was in the instructions, arguing that a reader wants to see text under a header, not search somewhere on the right where to continue reading. I still try to avoid it, rather have a short paragraph and then a left image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- That's the way I prefer to do it, too. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, Gerda, you make a very good point there. I think I will avoid such left images in the future. I actually moved an image left here because of how the subject is facing and how the above image encroached into the Pussyhat section. Do you think I should revert? Please feel free to do so if you think it best. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:23, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- I wouldn't revert that one, because of the facing, but perhaps place it with the second sentence, a bit smaller if needed, or shorter caption (repeats pretty much what we see anyway). Do we need the image on the right above it. It "squeezes" the text on my screen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Fair enough. If you wish to make image edits, please do as you see fit. I'm reluctant to discuss at this talk page what should be done at that article because it excludes others. So, as you wish. All the best, and nice to hear from you, Gerda. I hope you are well and happy. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:42, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- I tried ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- I like it! :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- I tried ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Fair enough. If you wish to make image edits, please do as you see fit. I'm reluctant to discuss at this talk page what should be done at that article because it excludes others. So, as you wish. All the best, and nice to hear from you, Gerda. I hope you are well and happy. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:42, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- I wouldn't revert that one, because of the facing, but perhaps place it with the second sentence, a bit smaller if needed, or shorter caption (repeats pretty much what we see anyway). Do we need the image on the right above it. It "squeezes" the text on my screen. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:34, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- It was in the instructions, arguing that a reader wants to see text under a header, not search somewhere on the right where to continue reading. I still try to avoid it, rather have a short paragraph and then a left image. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:43, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- Hello, my friend. Please let me know if you have new info on this. I've been making articles for years with section-top-left images. :) Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
My edit
Yeah, that was a mistake, sorry ! ƘƟ SĦ 18:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
- @KoshVorlon: That's okay! It happens. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:29, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
Question about article quality
Hi Muboshgu! I've been doing some work on expanding Mike Hollimon and I wanted to get some feedback on how to tell whether or not the article should still be considered a stub. Since you are an expert on writing baseball articles, I'd appreciate it if you or one of your talk page stalkers could weigh in. Also, have I made any glaring mistakes while working on that article? Thanks, Lepricavark (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I bumped it up to Start class. Sometimes it's a difficult call, but in this case I think it's definitely no longer a stub. I think this is a really commendable effort for a subject that played only 11 MLB games. I do notice that it's largely a retelling of season statistics; it would be interesting to see if we could find some sources on his playing style, what the scouts said about him, maybe even personal life or his post-baseball career. Not an easy task though... these "cup of coffee" players just don't get much coverage. EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:37, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Eric. I do intend to work on it more at some point in the near future, and I hope I'll be able to find some stuff along the lines of what you mentioned. Lepricavark (talk) 03:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Lepricavark: One of the main benchmarks I use is 1,500 characters of prose. That is the bare minimum required for WP:DYK, and it seems to be about the right amount to differentiate a stub that only conveys why the subject is notable from a start article that provides a little bit more info. Even that is a rough guideline. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:56, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- I'll try to remember that benchmark. I suppose it would be nice to take Hollimon to DYK, but I doubt if there's enough information about him to make it work. Lepricavark (talk) 04:53, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Lepricavark: One of the main benchmarks I use is 1,500 characters of prose. That is the bare minimum required for WP:DYK, and it seems to be about the right amount to differentiate a stub that only conveys why the subject is notable from a start article that provides a little bit more info. Even that is a rough guideline. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:56, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Eric. I do intend to work on it more at some point in the near future, and I hope I'll be able to find some stuff along the lines of what you mentioned. Lepricavark (talk) 03:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK for 2017 College Football Playoff National Championship
On 29 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2017 College Football Playoff National Championship, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Clemson Tigers defeated the Alabama Crimson Tide in the 2017 College Football Playoff National Championship on a game-winning touchdown with one second left? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2017 College Football Playoff National Championship. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2017 College Football Playoff National Championship), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Harrias talk 09:24, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Clarence B. Randall
On 29 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Clarence B. Randall, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the 1952 steel strike, Clarence B. Randall criticized President Harry S. Truman for what he considered "shocking distortions of fact"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Clarence B. Randall. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Clarence B. Randall), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Vanamonde (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello! This message is to let you know that your account for newspapers.com is now ready to use! Let me know if you have any questions by dropping a message on my User Talk page. Happy editing! --Cameron11598 (Talk) 18:32, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Cameron11598: Thank you! – Muboshgu (talk) 18:33, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Lost in London
On 31 January 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lost in London, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Woody Harrelson's Lost in London became the first film broadcast into theaters live? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lost in London. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Lost in London), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:29, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
4th GA Cup - Round 3
Hello, GA Cup competitors! Sunday saw the end of Round 2. Shearonink took out Round 2 with an amazing score of 499. In second place, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga earned an astounding 236 points, and in third place, Cartoon network freak received 136 points. Originally, we had plans for one wild card for 9th place, however it appears that both Chris troutman and J Milburn were tied for 9th place. Therefore, we have decided to have both advance to Round 3. In Round 2, 91 reviews were completed! At the beginning of this GA Cup, the longest wait was over 7 months; at the end of Round 2, the longest wait had decreased to a little over 6 months. It's clear that we continue to make a difference at GAN and throughout Wikipedia, something we should all be proud of. Thanks to all our competitors for helping to make the GA Cup a continued success, and for your part in helping other editors improve articles. We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 3 so we can keep decreasing the backlog. To qualify for the third round, contestants had to earn the two highest scores in each of the four pools in Round 2; plus, one wildcard. For Round 3, users were placed in 3 random pools of 3. To qualify for the Final of the 3rd Annual GA Cup, the top user in each pool will progress, and there will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 4th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 3 has already started and will end on February 26 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 3 and the pools can be found here. Also, we'd like to announce the departure of judge Zwerg Nase. We thank him for all his hardwork and hope to see him back in the future. Good luck and have fun! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:10, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Reference errors on 1 February
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
- On the Democratic National Committee chairmanship election, 2017 page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 February 2017
- Arbitration report: WMF Legal and ArbCom weigh in on tension between disclosure requirements and user privacy
- WikiProject report: For the birds!
- Technology report: Better PDFs, backup plans, and birthday wishes
- Traffic report: Cool It Now
- Featured content: Three weeks dominated by articles
Chris Carter
they have seriously just agreed as of 20 minutes ago and have signed him to a contract pending a physical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.26.71 (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
- @82.5.26.71: "Pending a physical" is the key phrase. Until it's passed, the deal is agreed to, not signed. Which means it hasn't taken place and could fall through. Per WP:CRYSTAL, we don't add it yet. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of LuAnn Bennett for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article LuAnn Bennett is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LuAnn Bennett until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Keri (talk) 20:07, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, you're right re this edit. I thought there were a lot more barereflinks. My bad. Yours, Quis separabit? 02:02, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Jewell Jones
On 13 February 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jewell Jones, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at age 21, Jewell Jones became the youngest State Representative in Michigan history? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jewell Jones. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jewell Jones), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 15:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:2016 Japan Series logo.gif
Thanks for uploading File:2016 Japan Series logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Yankees Roster - Matt Holliday
Before you revert me again, I'd like to know why you say we MUST stick to MLB.com, when they've proven to be at least slightly inaccurate in the past, and the team's own roster sent to the media lists Holliday as a DH. Almost none of the uniform numbers are on MLB.com, yet we use them. MLB.com has always had discrepancies in my past research on the Yankees roster, but usually they're minor. This really isn't minor. It is my belief that, in all sports situations, the information given directly by the team or media members with direct access to the team must supersede any site that is not run directly by the team. RevanFan (talk) 03:14, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support for my argument. https://twitter.com/BryanHoch/status/831545413870166022 RevanFan (talk) 03:15, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- @RevanFan: Well first off, you shouldn't have reverted me because the cycle is "bold, revert, discuss", not "bold, revert, revert, discuss". It's a way of standardizing these templates, to only use MLB.com. After all, that sheet in the photo lists Austin and Refsnyder as "INF/OF", so MLB.com is useful in telling us which category to put them in. As for uniform numbers, I don't pay much attention to what they are or who's adding them based on what. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- I understand you want a way of standardizing that. It's a fine goal. But this information comes from the team. I feel it should be 1. Info from the team and its media coverage, and 2. Info from MLB.com. For instance, take the roster handed out by the team and apply that, and use MLB.com for players whose positions are unclear or are split. I hope you're seeing where I'm coming from, and I hope the information gathered from the team's spring training media list will be kept on the template. I apologize for reverting the edit out of turn, by the way. I mostly edit the Dallas Cowboys roster template, and I'm pretty much one of two people who edits it. Almost all of my reverts over there are vandalism. Never a difference of opinion on source material. RevanFan (talk) 05:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not going to fight you on this, because I think it's trivial. If you want to discuss this further, maybe we should address the community at WT:BASEBALL. It's been our consensus there to use the one official source for the sake of uniformity. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:32, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- I understand you want a way of standardizing that. It's a fine goal. But this information comes from the team. I feel it should be 1. Info from the team and its media coverage, and 2. Info from MLB.com. For instance, take the roster handed out by the team and apply that, and use MLB.com for players whose positions are unclear or are split. I hope you're seeing where I'm coming from, and I hope the information gathered from the team's spring training media list will be kept on the template. I apologize for reverting the edit out of turn, by the way. I mostly edit the Dallas Cowboys roster template, and I'm pretty much one of two people who edits it. Almost all of my reverts over there are vandalism. Never a difference of opinion on source material. RevanFan (talk) 05:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
- @RevanFan: Well first off, you shouldn't have reverted me because the cycle is "bold, revert, discuss", not "bold, revert, revert, discuss". It's a way of standardizing these templates, to only use MLB.com. After all, that sheet in the photo lists Austin and Refsnyder as "INF/OF", so MLB.com is useful in telling us which category to put them in. As for uniform numbers, I don't pay much attention to what they are or who's adding them based on what. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Re: Congressional Cannabis Caucus
Thank you for creating this article. This is exactly the sort of article we're looking for editors to create for our upcoming "420" collaboration, which will be held in April for the purpose of creating and improving cannabis-related content at Wikipedia. If you have any interest in contributing to this project in April, feel free to watchlist the page or sign up! Thanks again, ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Muboshgu. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Jon Ossoff, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:
- edit the page
- remove the text that looks like this:
{{proposed deletion/dated...}} - save the page
Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Onel5969 TT me 16:15, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: Totally understand, but I think it should be returned to the redirect it was in my first edit. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:30, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hi. I totally agree. Have done just that. Lazy on my part, didn't see that there was a valid target.Onel5969 TT me 16:33, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Onel5969: That's okay! Totally understandable, most non-notable new articles don't have a valid redirect target. Thanks! – Muboshgu (talk) 16:40, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
User talk pages
The message I left (directed to the wrong user, btw) wasn't about the article content, but about the personal attacks the editor had experienced. I was just offering reassurance so he wouldn't be discouraged by the childish sniping which was motivated by bias. A user talk page is the correct avenue for such a comment. I also wasn't trying to "sway" the editor since it was his own viewpoint I was supporting. Please assume good faith and don't make dumb accusations. Centrify (f / k / a Factchecker_has_annoying_username) (talk) (contribs) 17:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Is this something that was ever used on the main portal page? Most of the dates are redlinks. If I was able to sufficiently improve upon this and create pages for the missing dates, do you think we would be able to find a place for this on the main portal page? Lepricavark (talk) 16:55, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Lepricavark: I don't know that it ever was used, but there's no reason not to use it if we fill in all the dates. We can make room somewhere. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- That seems reasonable. That being said, I took a closer look at the some of the pages that are filled in and they are unnecessarily long (and full of improper linking). Perhaps a better idea would be to highlight a handful of notable events (maybe limit it to 5 events and 5 notable births) for each day. Otherwise, it will be overwhelming to create and/or maintain a page for every single day. Also, fitting huge pages on the main portal would be difficult. I'm willing to take on such a smaller-scale project. Lepricavark (talk) 18:20, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
- As an example, check out my re-sizing at Portal:Baseball/Anniversaries/March 1. Lepricavark (talk) 20:40, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Censorship - Executive Order 13769
Please explain why you deleted the following content from the Executive Order 13769 article. The article is biased and the content was added to make it more balanced. There are good arguments for and against Executive Order 13769. Simply deleting arguments you don't agree with is inappropriate. It's better if reader are informed of both side of any dispute. I think the context of the Executive Order is relevant. WSDavitt (talk) 22:57, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
- The order was made in response to multiple terrorist attacks in the United States, Canada and western Europe during the past two decades [1] and the perceived failure to adequately vet immigrants and refugees. These attacks include the September 11 Attacks, Boston marathon bombing, 2016 Nice attack, Charlie Hebdo shooting, 2014 shootings at Parliament Hill, Ottawa, November 2015 Paris attacks and 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting. The order was made approximately 8 months after the Orlando nightclub shooting, the deadliest mass shooting in American history with 49 people killed and 53 wounded.
- @WSDavitt: Because the order had nothing to do with those attacks. It would be best to continue this discussion on the article's talk page. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:58, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. I will move the discussion to the articles talk page. WSDavitt (talk) 23:00, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Jon Ossoff for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jon Ossoff is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Ossoff until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 TT me 03:22, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 February 2017
- From the editors: Results from our poll on subscription and delivery, and a new RSS feed
- Recent research: Special issue: Wikipedia in education
- Technology report: Responsive content on desktop; Offline content in Android app
- In the media: The Daily Mail does not run Wikipedia
- Gallery: A Met montage
- Special report: Peer review – a history and call for reviewers
- Op-ed: Wikipedia has cancer
- Featured content: The dominance of articles continues
- Traffic report: Love, football, and politics
Your message to me, about the category Pence family
Hello Muboshgu,
This is Markvo. I just got a message from you about my category, Pence family. My intent, with that category, and the others families listed in that category, is to create a category list for the families of the U.S. Vice Presidents, or Second families. There is already a such list for the families of the Presidents of the United States and I thought it would be a good and informative idea to do the same for the Vice Presidents.
I realize that the Presidents are more prominent and better known to the general public. But I think that people who are interested in American history and the role of the Vice Presidents would appreciate the information. My intent was good, I hope you understand, and I did not intend to break any rules or standard practices here on Wikipedia. I enjoy reading a lot of articles on this site and also enjoy contributing to it from time to time as well. I am not aware of any rule of this site that my contribution is in violation of, but please let me know if I am. If I am not, I would respectfully ask and greatly appreciate that the category be allowed to stay on Wikipedia, so that those who want to read it and use it will be allowed to do so in the future. Thank you and please feel free to send me another message about this subject if you wish.
Sincerely,
Markvo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markvo (talk • contribs) 17:45, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Markvo: I understand that, but I don't think that category meets Wikipedia's standards on categorization, specifically WP:SMALLCAT. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Your message to me, about the category Pence family
Hello again. I just checked out that link you sent me to, SmallCat. It says right in it's description that articles pertaining to holders of a notable political office may be kept, even if only a small number of articles exist presently. Mike Pence currently holds the office of Vice President of the United States. I would consider that a notable office for sure. And as his wife, Karen Pence is the Second Lady of the United States. Their category together (Pence family) should therefore be kept and should be included in the larger category I have included it in (Second Families of the United States) as well, in my opinion.
Thank you,
Markvo Markvo (talk) 18:27, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Markvo: I don't see "realistic potential for growth" there. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Independent Democratic Conference
On 1 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Independent Democratic Conference, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some Democrats in the New York State Senate formed the Independent Democratic Conference to caucus with Republicans? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Independent Democratic Conference. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Independent Democratic Conference), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
March 2017 WikiCup newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:
Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.
The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.
So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Congressional Cannabis Caucus
On 6 March 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Congressional Cannabis Caucus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that last month, four members of the U.S. House of Representatives formed the Congressional Cannabis Caucus? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Congressional Cannabis Caucus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Congressional Cannabis Caucus), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 12:02, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
4th GA Cup - The Final
Hello, GA Cup competitors! Sunday, February 26 saw the end of Round 3. Shearonink finished in first with 616 points, which is more than the point totals for all the other competitors combined! In second place, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga earned an impressive 152 points, followed by Sturmvogel_66 in third with 111 points. Chris troutman and Kees08 each received a wild-card and were able to advance to the Final Round. There was a major error on the part of the judges, and initially, 8 users were advanced instead of 5. This has been corrected, and we sincerely apologize for this confusion. In Round 3, 71 reviews were completed! At the beginning of this GA Cup, the longest wait was over 7 months; at the end of Round 3, the longest wait is still holding steady at a little over 6 months, the same as for the previous round. By the end of all three Rounds, the total number of nominations increased slightly - this suggests that users are more willing to nominate, knowing that their articles will be reviewed. We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in the Final so we can keep tackling the backlog. In the Final Round, the user with the highest score will be the winner. The Final has already started and will end on March 31st at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Finals and the pools can be found here. Good luck and have fun! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Congrats on Cannabis Caucus DYK! Invite to 420 Collaboration
Great and timely article addition, congrats on the DYK!
Are you aware that we have a big Cannabis Collaboration planned for this April? You can see the main page here, and we're chatting it out on the Talk page too: [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/420 Collaboration ]]. You may also be interested in watch listing Wikipedia:WikiProject Cannabis/Discussions to be able to see conversations happening anywhere in the project. Goonsquad LCpl Mulvaney (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for heads up on Matt Weiters reversion
Thanks for clarifying on your reversion of my edit to Matt Weiters' page. You were right that the 2-year Nats deal wasn't technically official at that point, despite the Washington Post report on Feb 22. I see the deal's been finalized and formally added to the page now, so that works for me.
Madison78 (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
DSL Orioles
Today the Orioles announced that they are going with one DSL team instead of two. Should we delete the second roster template or redirect it to Template:Dominican Summer League Orioles roster. They may expand in the future back to two teams but who knows? Thanks for your input. NYGiantsfan1991 (talk) 18:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited José Quintana, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All-Star break. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Do I need sources?
Hello Muboshgu, You recently blocked me from editing some wiki pages, even though my contributions are laced in facts. There may be a difference in narrative then you may like but with knowledge does not discriminate. In order to tastefully edit some pages, would it help if I citied my sources? I do have to work on my citation in sandbox. Been having some issues with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justice WarriorUltimate (talk • contribs) 23:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Yankees
Since I haven't been around Wiki for the past couple spring trainings, I figured I'd ask you since I forgot. The Yanks optioned two players this morning. Should we have the asterisk next their names on the 40-man roster? Or are we waiting until camp breaks? http://m.yankees.mlb.com/roster/transactions/ Happy to be back on days at work again so I can help out! Kjscotte34 (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Kjscotte34: Welcome back. Yep use the asterisk. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:42, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
2017 World Baseball Classic rosters
Regarding this edit, is there no acceptable way to count up the number of players on each team's roster that play in various leagues? It seems to me that this information is helpful for the reader to put the tournament results into context. The affiliations are no more unsourced than everything else in the page; it's only the fact that I counted them that could be called "unsourced." Also, while it's true that there is no official ranking of leagues by strength in baseball, like there is in other sports like soccer, it still seems that the text you deleted covered the strongest leagues (not just in the U.S.) and that any deficiencies could have been fixed. I'm interested to know more about what you think. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 06:27, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- It can be fixed, but it appeared to me too broken to keep. The page is indeed lacking in sources. MLB is the strongest league, but the others weren't given their due in the way it was written. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
WBC finals
Note: There's also articles 2006 World Baseball Classic Final, 2009 World Baseball Classic Final and 2013 World Baseball Classic Final. You're free to re-direct those to the corresponding articles as well. GoodDay (talk) 20:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
- @GoodDay: I think I will. They're redundant. Better to treat the championship round like a World Series. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:40, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, they're very basically the same topics. GoodDay (talk) 20:41, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
children's school
I thought it would be relevant, but since you removed it, I agree. Thanks. SW3 5DL (talk) 06:42, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Re: James Shields
Ahem, excuse me? He DID give up a home run to Bartolo Colon. I even cited a source. How does my truthful edit constitute vandalism? If anything yours does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.244.138.190 (talk) 01:36, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
- It's not what he's "best known for". Your edit is not constructive. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
McCuthen Image
Why did you just entirely dismiss my McCuthen image? I'm a community member of for 12 years - while Keith Allison takes great photos, and has a $5,000 camera to do so, I don't think my McCuthen image is *that* bad. Plus, he's smiling in this one. I don't revert any of your work, so can you please offer me some my contributions some more respect? Thank you, Terry Foote (talk) 13:30, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Terry Foote: Don't take it personally that Keith Allison takes some of the best baseball pictures we have. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- No, I don't. I did some digging on Flickr and found out he has a $5K Nikon. I think he's a pro. The thing is, I love going to games, taking photos, and contributing to Wikipedia. I hope that counts for something. Plus, I'm proud of that Cutch image - I caught him smiling. It's a unique photo of him, post dred-lock shearing. Terry Foote (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Terry Foote: Keith Allison is definitely professional, which is why his images are so great. We're lucky that he makes them available to us. In hindsight I believe I erred in taking your photo out entirely, rather than moving it into the body. And I will say that I think it looks better at its current size. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- Allison has some outstanding images, especially one of Mike Trout stealing a home run. Thank you for your for your kind words on the Cutch image - but I still think it's infobox worthy :) Terry Foote (talk) 16:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Terry Foote: Keith Allison is definitely professional, which is why his images are so great. We're lucky that he makes them available to us. In hindsight I believe I erred in taking your photo out entirely, rather than moving it into the body. And I will say that I think it looks better at its current size. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
- No, I don't. I did some digging on Flickr and found out he has a $5K Nikon. I think he's a pro. The thing is, I love going to games, taking photos, and contributing to Wikipedia. I hope that counts for something. Plus, I'm proud of that Cutch image - I caught him smiling. It's a unique photo of him, post dred-lock shearing. Terry Foote (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
ITN recognition for 2017 World Baseball Classic – Championship
On 23 March 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2017 World Baseball Classic – Championship, which you recently nominated and substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. SpencerT♦C 16:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
ITN recognition for Dallas Green (baseball)
On 24 March 2017, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Dallas Green (baseball), which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:14, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:42, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Trump RFC
I have added a note to the RFC question, for greater clarity.Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:41, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Catherine Templeton
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Catherine Templeton, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
- Apologies -- you created a redirect. It was another editor who turned it into an ad. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:10, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
- @WikiDan61: That's fine! I certainly agree with you that shouldn't have remained as that user made it. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:12, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
DYK nomination of The President Show
Hello! Your submission of The President Show at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! SL93 (talk) 10:21, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Bernie Sanders photos
Hi Muboshgu, your thoughts would be welcome at a discussion at Talk:Bernie Sanders#Photos. User:HopsonRoad 13:31, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi, Muboshgu, I noticed your revert and your remark: WHY? I have another question, why only add images from certain baseball players? It looks like not everyone is treated in the same way. Imo it is better to have images of "all players" added into the wikitable, the table is there, so why not do what seems logic? Lotje (talk) 11:33, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Lotje: I should've been more clear. Why put them in the table? It makes the table significantly larger. Not everyone has an image on Wikipedia, and to present one for everybody is overkill. A few representative images help the page but only a few are needed. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:27, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- Okay fine by me, we certainly do not want to overkill...
Lotje (talk) 15:28, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
- Okay fine by me, we certainly do not want to overkill...
Revert of One China Policy
Hi Muboshgu, why was my edit reverted? Is there a valid, non-political factual reason? If so, please quote/direct me to the Wikipedia policy. Thanks. Mistakefinder (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Mistakefinder: Because we follow WP:NPOV. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:13, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
DYK for Brockmire
On 13 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Brockmire, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Hank Azaria won a lawsuit for the rights to the title character of Brockmire? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Brockmire. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Brockmire), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Yuccie deletion
I cannot create an AFD page for Yuccie. Can you do so instead? Not able to create account currently.
My rationale: {{subst:afd2 | pg=Yuccie| cat=S| text=[[WP:NEO]]. All sources do is regurgitate the fluff piece of one blogger. No evidence of widespread usage aside, societal significance or importance whatsoever. To cite the policy directly: {{cquote|To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term.}}}} ~~~~
Thanks. Appreciate it. 99.246.202.164 (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
@Ansh666: thank you. 99.246.202.164 (talk) 02:02, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
DYK for The President Show
On 21 April 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The President Show, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Comedy Central advertised The President Show by faking a Russian hack? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The President Show. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, The President Show), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
FLC review request
Hey Muboshgu! Could I trouble you to have a look at List of Major League Baseball players with a .400 batting average in a season FLC if you have time? Kinda desperate for reviews since it's been open since January. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Here's are RS:
- Samuel, Henry (21 April 2017). "How Champs Elysees attack could swing the French presidential election". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 21 April 2017.
- Willsher, Kim (21 April 2017). "Fears that Paris shooting will affect presidental election as first round looms". The Guardian. Retrieved 21 April 2017.
The second one is actually cited in the article. Thanks!Zigzig20s (talk) 09:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Zigzig20s: From the headlines, "could swing", "fears" ... all opinion. We won't know until Sunday night, if at all. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- I will add those references to the discussion if it gets re-opened. Sorry I was a bit curt. I think your concern was in good faith.Zigzig20s (talk) 00:49, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
- Look, even President Trump agrees!Zigzig20s (talk) 04:09, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, Trump never talks out of his ass. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Hunter Greene (baseball) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hunter Greene (baseball) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hunter Greene (baseball) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- I've withdrawn the nomination. I searched for Hunter Green, another baseball player, rather than Greene. Greene does have enough press coverage. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for withdrawing. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
- ^ "Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States". US Federal Registrar. Retrieved 21 February 2017.
Section 2 - It is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from foreign nationals who intend to commit terrorist attacks in the United States;